Search This Blog

Saturday, March 31, 2012

Conservatives love to claim that there's a double standard in how Rush Limbaugh has been treated compared to liberal sexists. And they're correct, but not the way they suspect: Rush Limbaugh has always been given a free pass by the right for his sexism, while feminists frequently critique the sexism of the left.

Chelsea Clinton mentioned that, "She and I actually have something in common. We've both been attacked by Rush Limbaugh. I also believe that if you have the right type of enemies you are doing something correct."

It's important to recall that moment that I detail in my book, The Most Dangerous Man in America: Rush Limbaugh's Assault on Reason. On November 6, 1992 (before Clinton was even inaugurated), Rush said on his television show: “In: A cute kid in the White House. Out: Cute dog in the White House.' Could--could we see the cute kid? Let's take a look at--see who is the cute kid in the White House. [A picture is shown of Millie the dog] No, no, no. That's not the kid. [Picture shown of Chelsea Clinton] That's--that's the kid. We're trying to...[Applause] No, just kidding.”

According to one defense of Limbaugh, “The real version has Rush talking about a 'cute dog' as well as a 'cute kid,' obviously not a set-up for calling the kid a dog. It is not an assault on Chelsea, as her picture only comes up in the context of correcting the error....Rush has always maintained the incident was an accident.”

The “cute kid” reference was nothing but an excuse to compare Chelsea to a dog. If Limbaugh had not intended to show Chelsea's picture, he would never have said, “Just kidding.” There was no mistake, and his fake apology was just another excuse to show the picture over and over again: “There I go. My friends, I apologize again. I--that's the third time the crew makes a mistake by showing you Millie the dog when I intended to show you Chelsea Clinton...”

This wasn’t the first time that Limbaugh tried to hide behind a technician to excuse his hateful comments toward women. A USA Today reporter at Limbaugh’s radio studio two weeks before the attack on Chelsea noted that while playing the song “Men” for Limbaugh’s Feminist Update, “Limbaugh's technicians, at his command, punctuate the song with a sounds of cows mooing. Every time the cows moo, Limbaugh orders 'Men' stopped. 'Don't do that!' Stop. The music starts again. More moos. Stop! Music. ('Throw another one in there!' he says off mike, chuckling).” So Limbaugh had a documented record of ordering his staff to compare women to animals and then pretending that the technicians were violating his commands.

Nor was this the first daughter of a president that Limbaugh had insulted, since he had also called Amy Carter ugly. Continuing his tradition of insulting the daughters of Democratic presidents, in 2010 Limbaugh referred Malia and Sasha Obama as the president's “two fat daughters” and falsely claimed that the First Lady had called them fat.

Limbaugh continued to smear Chelsea Clinton after she became an adult. In 2009, he claimed: “Chelsea Clinton said it was Bush's tax cuts that led to 9/11. She did.” No, she didn't. Chelsea Clinton wrote an article for Talk Magazine explaining what she was doing in lower Manhattan when 9-11 happened: “I was expounding on the detriments of Bush's tax cut as we approached Grand Central Terminal and were met with hordes of people running out of the station.” She wrote, "Once we stopped running, I started praying. I prayed for my country and my city. I stopped berating the tax cut and started praying that the president would rise to lead us.”

So Chelsea Clinton never blamed 9-11 on the Bush tax cuts; she happened to be criticizing the Bush tax cuts when 9-11 happened, and then promptly stopped doing it to unify with the rest of the country behind Bush. Yet Limbaugh, the man who compared Chelsea at 13 to a dog and then lied about what she wrote in 2001, had the audacity to claim, “Chelsea has had a charmed life in terms of not having to deal with any kind of press that is especially critical or probing.” Because, after all, 13-year-old girls certainly deserve critical and probing media coverage of their physical appearance.

When David Letterman told a joke about Alex Rodriguez that mentioned getting Sarah Palin's daughter pregnant, Rush was one of the leaders of the outrage: “A joke like that about any woman is just in bad taste and it's not funny.” He claimed, “shows like that are beneath me.” Limbaugh claimed about Sarah Palin's daughter, “It is just despicable, what we have become in this country, to destroy a 17-year-old girl in the hopes of destroying her mother and her father.” Apparently that same logic didn't apply to the 13-year-old daughter of a Democratic president.

Limbaugh also invoked the common conservative tactic of the double standard: "the double standard clearly exists, and it always will." Limbaugh was talking about how unlike Palin's daughter, "Chelsea Clinton was off-limits all during the Clinton presidency and the Drive-Bys bent over forward, grabbed the ankles, said, ‘Okay Clinton, whatever you want.’” He contended that the media “left Chelsea Clinton alone.” Limbaugh was wrong; there was media attention to Chelsea's boyfriends during the Clinton Administration, but since Chelsea never got pregnant, it never became a major story.

Limbaugh's insults against Chelsea Clinton are an important reminder of how conservatives invoke a false "double standard" to defend the indefensible, even when (as in Limbaugh's case) they're guilty of the very same smears they attack. Limbaugh's assault on Chelsea also should remind us that his attack on Sandra Fluke wasn't a fluke: it was a continuation of his decades-long career of sexist smears against women.

Monday, March 19, 2012

It's interesting. You know, I use two words in 23 years that showed questionable judgment. Two words in 23 years. These entertainers and pundits on the left seem to use 23 obscene words every day or every two days. Back in 2008, the rapper Ludacris supported Obama. The two met in Obama's senatorial office and, in his rap song praising Obama, he called Hillary a b-i-itch. Obama smiled. You remember that? "Hillary hated on you," said Ludacris. "That b-i-itch irrelevant. Jesse talkin' slick and apologizin' for..." It was a special rap song written for Obama in which Mrs. Clinton, former first lady, the current secretary of state, was referred to as a b-i-itch.

Except that he did. In 2008, Limbaugh referred to Hillary Clinton as a “b-i-itch,” pretending to “translate” Obama's view of her. That same year, Limbaugh also referred to Clinton as a “b-i-itch” by comparing her to One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest character Nurse Ratched: “a lot of people think that she's Nurse Ratched. Nurse Ratched wasn't really human. Nurse Ratched was a mean b-i-itch.” And Limbaugh was certainly one of those people who thought Clinton was the “b-i-tch” Nurse Ratched. In 2007, Limbaugh declared, “Hillary Clinton is Nurse Ratched!” He also said Hillary Clinton "sounds like a screeching ex-wife.” He compared her looks to a Pontiac hood ornament. He's spread rumors that Hillary is a lesbian, and accused her of being mannish.

Nor is Hillary the only woman Limbaugh has publicly called a bitch. Limbaugh called Friends of the Earth international climate campaigner Catherine Pearce a "B-I-itch" after watching her criticize President Bush's State of the Union proposals on CNN. And on March 8, a few days after making his fake apology to Sandra Fluke, Limbaugh attacked a female Washington Post blogger for her “b-i-itchy opinion” critical of Rush. That was three days after Limbaugh complained about the degradation of popular culture in America: “The word bitch is common.”

Bitch is certainly not the only sexist insult in Rush's vocabulary. He's called Nancy Pelosi a “ditz” and a “complete airhead.” He called Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, a “ditz.” His nickname for Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) is "Cute Little Baby Fat.”

All female journalists are “reportettes” or “anchorettes” or “info babes,” and part of the vast “chickification of news” caused by “the chicks in high positions in the media.”
Rush particularly likes to insult the appearance of women and girls. In 2009, Limbaugh said about the late feminist Andrea Dworkin “she could be poster child” for the obese.

He called Amy Carter ugly, compared Chelsea Clinton to a dog on his TV show when she was 13 years old, and referred to Malia and Sasha Obama as the president's “two fat daughters.”

And like Sandra Fluke, liberal women are often the subject of sexual smears by Limbaugh, who declared about Anita Hill, “My guess is she's had plenty of spankings, if you catch my meaning.”

Perhaps the worst insult is the word Limbaugh proudly invented: feminazi. Comparing all feminists (including Sandra Fluke) to the worst genocidal regime in human history is an appalling smear that Rush Limbaugh has done over and over for decades.

This isn't about obscene words. It's about bigoted words. Rush Limbaugh is banned by the FCC from using obscene words, so he doesn't say them on his show. Bill Maher and other entertainers are perfectly free to use obscene words, so they do.

Now, I think Bill Maher is a sexist pig, and so are many entertainers and pundits, on both the left and (especially) the right. And yes, there isn't enough criticism of this sexism by feminists. But you don't see Bill Maher having a president invite him to the White House and bring him a birthday cake, as George W. Bush did for Rush. None of these sexists on the left can compare to Limbaugh, who is the undisputed king of sexist conservatives.

How can Limbaugh lie so brazenly, to complain about the “double standard”? Perhaps because he lives in a delusional bubble. Until Sandra Fluke, none of Limbaugh's sexist smears have attracted the slightest bit of criticism from the right. Limbaugh has been the beneficiary of a lifetime of double standards.

With Fluke, Limbaugh's mistake may have been to viciously target someone who isn't a celebrity, pundit, or politician, and to do it in pornographic ways, demanding to see sex videos of her, an act that finally alienated the Christian conservatives who have always supported Limbaugh and refused to criticize him.

But there's no evidence that conservatives are willing to criticize Rush for any of the sexist remarks he's made over and over for years before Sandra Fluke. Until they do, we can see clearly where the real double standard is. The double standard is embraced by the conservatives who for 23 years have embraced Rush Limbaugh as a leading voice of their movement while he repeatedly smeared women, as he still does.

Friday, March 9, 2012

I am no friend of Rush Limbaugh, considering that I wrote an entire book criticizing his bigotry and stupidity, but I do defend his freedom of speech.

Talking Points Memo reports that lawyer Gloria Allred, on behalf of the Women's Equal Rights Legal Defense and Education Fund, has written to the prosecutor in Limbaugh's home county in West Palm Beach, Florida, asking for a criminal investigation of Rush's insults against Sandra Fluke.

It does no service to feminism or freedom of speech to call for Rush Limbaugh to be prosecuted for his speech.

The Florida statute is one of the worst examples of sexist paternalism, pretending to “protect” women by treating them like weaklings needing the defense of the state against offenses to the virtue. It's no small irony that at the bottom of Allred's letter is the text of the never-adopted Equal Rights Amendment: “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” Clearly, a law that protects the “chastity” reputation of women but not men fails to meet that equal rights standard.

The Florida statute, incidentally, makes it a misdemeanor to publish an anonymously-written statement which attempts “to bring disgrace or ridicule upon any person,” making DailyKos' owners and editors guilty of several million crimes.

Criminal defamation should be considered unconstitutional beyond any redemption. When it's mixed with an archaic sexist law that regards the value of women as depending upon their “chastity,” it's even more repulsive.

Limbaugh deserves criticism for his sexism, far more criticism that Mitt Romney and other Republicans have offered. Most of all, he deserves the greatest criticism for calling Sandra Fluke and all other feminists (including me) Nazis with his use of the term “feminazi” to describe her. Comparing anyone who supports women's equality with the worst genocidal regime in human history is a thousand times more offensive than insulting the chastity of women.

Sadly, some of the outrage against Limbaugh reflects the very same sexist notions embodied in the Florida law invoked by Allred, that the "chastity" of women is what makes them worthy. Many conservatives think it's completely appropriate to call feminists Nazis, and seek to limit the rights of women to health care, whereas questioning the chastity of a woman goes too far. Limbaugh's pornographic fantasies about Fluke are the flip side of the Florida "chastity" law, an attempt to treat women as sexual objects whose most valuable commodity is their virginity.

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Rush Limbaugh's insults against Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke have sparked a national controversy. Today (Wednesday), I'll be discussing Limbaugh (and my book about him) on Al Sharpton's MSNBC show (6-7pm ET) and Thursday on the public radio show To the Point (2pm ET).

But Limbaugh's attacks on Fluke are also a reminder of the fact that we should stand for real religious liberty. Not the nonexistent “freedom” of religious institutions to deny medical care to their students, but the individual religious freedom of people to make their own health care choices.

Limbaugh's very personal assault on an individual woman clarified this debate about contraception and religious liberty. It had been framed as a debate about the so-called “academic freedom” of religious colleges and the religious liberty of employers against women's health.

But I want to argue that this is indeed an issue of religious liberty and academic freedom. It's a simple question of whether rights belong to individuals or to groups.

There is no such thing as a collective Constitutional right for religious groups; there is only individual religious freedom. Yes, religious organizations are protected, but only because of the individual rights of the people who constitute them. The only mention of religious organizations in the First Amendment is a prohibition on “an establishment of religion.” The same is true of academic freedom: there is no such thing as a Constitutional right of institutional academic freedom. Colleges and universities as institutions receive some protection from government intrusion only to help protect the individual rights of the employees and students who constitute a college. When an institutional policy infringes upon an individual's academic freedom, no misguided concept of “institutional academic freedom” can overrule the real academic freedom that belongs to individuals.

When Georgetown University prohibits Sandra Fluke from receiving contraceptive coverage in her health care plan, and imposes its religious values upon her, it is violating her religious liberty and her academic freedom. Georgetown cannot invoke religious liberty and academic freedom in the name of taking away an individual's right to liberty.

This is Sandra Fluke's health insurance. She pays for it ($1,895 a year), and while it may be organized and partially subsidized by Georgetown, it belongs to her. No employer, no university, has a right to infringe upon the individual's religious liberty to choose health care according to his or her own religious values.

I'm sure some people will point out that Fluke knew that Georgetown was a Catholic institution which refused to cover contraception when she choose to attend. That's true. In the real world, nobody works at or attends a perfect university. It might be unwise to attend a religious institution if it will limit your individual liberty, but the blame for those violations of individual liberty still falls upon the university, not the student. If a professor works at a religious institution that limits academic freedom, the AAUP (and all of us) should still condemn that college if it fires the professor for his or her beliefs.

And if a government policy protects gender equality and religious liberty in medical coverage for all individuals no matter what the religious beliefs of the employer or the college, we should praise it.

If Georgetown University decides that it doesn't like contraception, then it is perfectly free to express that opposition to contraception. Georgetown is still free to rationally persuade its students, by force of argument, to refuse birth control bills and other forms of contraception. That's the kind of academic freedom Georgetown administrators have, the right to speak freely without imposing their misguided religious beliefs on all students and employees.

Rush Limbaugh's insulting remarks have led to a national discussion about sexism and hateful speech. But they should also lead us to a more enlightened debate about the true meaning of religious liberty and the individuals who hold it.

Monday, March 5, 2012

This is the greatest crisis in Rush Limbaugh's entire career. He has always been controversial and offensive, but never before have his hand-picked advertisers abandoned him en masse, as nine of these companies have now done.

Today, Limbaugh claimed that he had “no ulterior motive” for his fake apology for his 53 smears, that it was “pure, simple, heartfelt.” Of course, nobody believes that. This is all about the money. Limbaugh has observed, “I always say my real purpose is to attract the largest audience I can, and hold it for as long as I can, so I can charge confiscatory advertising rates.” When his advertising revenue is threatened, Limbaugh will be moved to make a fake apology.

Amazingly, today Limbaugh blamed left-wingers for causing him to insult Sandra Fluke: “I acted too much like the leftists who despise me.” Limbaugh claimed, “In fighting them on this issue last week, I became like them....I descended to their level....I became like the people we oppose” Do leftists describe their ideological opponents as “sluts” and “prostitutes” and accuse them of having “too much sex”?

Limbaugh claimed that he used “inappropriate words in a way I never do.” Never? The man who repeatedly has called Hillary Clinton and other women “B-I-itch” actually had the audacity to complain today, “The word 'bitch' is common.” It is if you're Rush Limbaugh, who once publicly called Friends of the Earth international climate campaigner Catherine Pearce a "B-I-itch" after watching her criticize President Bush's State of the Union proposals on CNN. Every woman is just one ideological disagreement with Limbaugh away from being condemned as “ugly,” “ditz,” “bitch,” or “feminazi.” It's how he views all women, except those who prove their devotion to him by being docile, conservative housewives admired as subservient sex objects.

Limbaugh once declared about Anita Hill, “My guess is she's had plenty of spankings, if you catch my meaning.” Accusing liberal women of being whores is the typical tactic of Rush Limbaugh; it's not something he learned from the left.

Limbaugh's fake apology was all about the advertisers he's losing. Limbaugh declared in the early 1990s, “A turning point in my career came when I realized that the sole purpose for all of us in radio is to sell advertising.” Rush recalled, “I realized out there that if I was ultimately going to succeed I had to get myself actively involved in the revenue stream of the radio station.” Limbaugh understood that he could have control over his program “if you had your hand on a certain amount of the revenue stream.”

From the start of his talk show, he has been obsessed with his advertisers. Early in his radio career in Sacramento, Limbaugh tried to demand that he decide what advertisers would be allowed on his show. He understood from the start that his advertisers would determine the fate of his career. For Limbaugh, selling products was “ratings insurance.” Rush meets personally several times a year with all of his advertisers who hire him to voice their ads, precisely in order to avoid what happened this week.
One study found that Limbaugh actually had a bigger audience during the commercial breaks than during his show itself. Rush's listeners are so devoted to him that they pay more attention to his commercials than to his ideas. And Limbaugh has merged advertising into his show content so completely that his listeners barely distinguish between the two.

In the 1990s, Limbaugh lost advertising for Florida orange juice after the National Organization for Women, the National Education Association, the NAACP, and other groups led a boycott of the product. In 2003, Radio Shack and Amtrak dropped their advertising, claiming that they avoid political shows and only advertised due to a mistake. Boycotts normally can't affect him because many of his advertisers are not major retailers, but mid-sized online businesses that rely on Limbaugh loyalists for a substantial part of their business.

For Limbaugh, who worships “confiscatory advertising rates” and the $55 million a year he makes, the loss of his advertisers is the greatest threat that he's ever faced. He's been hit in the wallet, which is the only sensitive part he has.

Rush Limbaugh's fake apology on Saturday may have surprised some people, because Limbaugh almost never apologizes for anything he says, nor does he correct the seemingly endless factual errors that he makes. In fact, Limbaugh boasted in 2005: "We don't retract anything we do here because we never lie and make things up on this program." As Rush declared in 2009, “I don't apologize. Ever. Of course, it helps that I'm never wrong."

But Limbaugh understands the necessity of making a fake apology for the sake of your career. In 1984, Limbaugh got his big break in radio when he was hired to replace Morton Downey, Jr., a shock jock at KFBK in Sacramento, California who had been fired for telling a joke about “chinks” and refusing to apologize.

Limbaugh's apology on Saturday was plainly insincere, particularly since Limbaugh claimed, “I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.” Limbaugh personally attacked Fluke's sexual behavior at least 53 times last week, so no one can possibly take this fake apology seriously.

In my book about Limbaugh, I note that twice before, he has uttered the words, “I apologize,” and the cases of Chelsea Clinton and Michael J. Fox reveal just how insincere Rush's apologies are.

On November 6, 1992, Rush said this on his television show:

In: A cute kid in the White House. Out: Cute dog in the White House.' Could--could we see the cute kid? Let's take a look at--see who is the cute kid in the White House. [A picture is shown of Millie the dog] No, no, no. That's not the kid. [Picture shown of Chelsea Clinton] That's--that's the kid. We're trying to...[Applause] No, just kidding.

The “cute kid” reference was nothing but an excuse to compare Chelsea to a dog. If Limbaugh had not intended to show Chelsea's picture, he would never have said, “Just kidding.” There was no mistake, and his fake apology was just another excuse to show the picture over and over again: “There I go. My friends, I apologize again. I--that's the third time the crew makes a mistake by showing you Millie the dog when I intended to show you Chelsea Clinton...”

Limbaugh's “I apologize again” wasn't regret, it was part of the script for insulting a 12-year-old girl because she had the name “Clinton.” Limbaugh never apologized to Chelsea Clinton, not for comparing her to a dog, nor for any of the other terrible lies he has said about her over the years.

Limbaugh's most notable faux-apology before this Saturday came in 2006, when he attacked Michael J. Fox. Fox, who suffers from Parkinson's disease, appeared in a campaign commercial for Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Claire McCaskill because she supported stem-cell research. Limbaugh declared that Fox was faking his Parkinson’s disease symptoms: "In this commercial, he is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He is moving all around and shaking. And it's purely an act. . . . This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting, one of the two." On his “dittocam,” Limbaugh was gyrating back and forth in a mock tremor, displaying how he thought Fox was faking the symptoms of his disease.

As in the Fluke case, Limbaugh's initial response to criticism was completely defensive. Limbaugh claimed there was a media conspiracy against him: "Some networks have sped it up to try to enhance the spastic-like nature of it. They are all saying that I was 'mocking, making fun of. How low will Limbaugh go now and next? This is unconscionable.' It is absurd and ridiculous for them to make this charge that I would make fun of somebody in this circumstance.” Of course, Limbaugh offered no evidence to support his ridiculous charge that multiple networks had sped up the footage of him mocking Fox. And if Limbaugh wasn't trying to mock Fox, he certainly was doing a very good acting job pretending to be someone mocking a man with Parkinson's disease.

But as the criticism grew, Limbaugh responded on October 23, 2006, with his classic fake apology: “So I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox, if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act, especially since people are telling me they have seen him this way on other interviews and in other television appearances.”

On Oct. 26, 2006, Limbaugh said: “I need to apologize, I was wrong because I speculated either he didn't take his medication or he was acting.” But this, too, wasn't really an apology; instead, Limbaugh noted that Fox's appearance was caused by taking too much medication, and Limbaugh said this was intentional: “I think the reason for that is so you would really, really hate Republicans.”

Sunday, March 4, 2012

While Rush Limbaugh has offered his fake apology to Sandra Fluke for calling her a slut and a whore, it's important to recall each of the 53 times last week when Rush insulted Fluke. So I've compiled a comprehensive list, each of them linked to Limbaugh's own transcript of what he said. Does one half-hearted apology make up for 53 smears?

For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week.

I talk a lot. I can't be held responsible for accidentally saying something over and over again 20 times.

In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation.

My advertisers are upset with me.

I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.

It wasn't personal. I was trying to insult all liberal women as sluts and prostitutes, like I always do.

I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress.

Unlike, say, discussing the personal sexual recreational activities of members of Congress like Anthony Weiner, or President Bill Clinton, which was not absurd at all during serious political times.

I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities.

Except, of course, for the American citizens like Ms. Fluke who have to pay for birth control pills. What I meant to say is that American corporations shouldn't pay for medical expenses for women.

What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line?

If we allow birth control pills to be covered by insurance like other prescription pills, then pretty soon people may start illegally buying hundreds of thousands of dollars in prescription pills without suffering any penalty.

If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?

As we all know, running is a liberal conspiracy which I refuse to obey.

In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.

And that's exactly why I kept talking about what Ms. Fluke was doing in her bedroom, to illustrate that it was not my business to know anything about it.

My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir.

I'm so funny, you people can't handle the humor.

I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.

I sincerely want people to stop criticizing me for insulting women. I've done it so many times before, I can't believe that this one upset everybody.

Friday, March 2, 2012

On Wednesday, Rush Limbaugh made one of the biggest mistakes of his career. He attacked law student Sandra Fluke (calling her “Susan”), and declared: “What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute.”

Limbaugh has a long history of insulting women in crude terms that I detail in my book, The Most Dangerous Man in America: Rush Limbaugh's Assault on Reason. But in the past Limbaugh has usually attacked female politicians and celebrities, not women who merely dared to express their views to Congress. By picking on Fluke, and doing it in an incredibly crude way, Limbaugh made a serious error.

In the past, Limbaugh might have delivered a fake apology or hidden behind his usual defense of claiming to be “joking” and then blame "feminazis" who have no sense of humor. Instead, on Thursday, Limbaugh doubled down and said, "if we're going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch." This was another serious error: by embracing pornography, he alienated the religious conservatives who often support him.

So that's 14 times in one show that Limbaugh went out and effectively called Fluke a slut, accusing her of having so much sex that she needs birth control. In doing so, Limbaugh displayed not only his sexism, but his total ignorance. Limbaugh actually believes that the amount of birth control pills a woman takes depends on how much sex she has. That simple ignorant belief is the basis for all of his endless “slut” attacks.

Limbaugh concluded his tirade with an unusually bizarre conspiracy theory: “The Obama administration will take away your birth control, and if you let 'em do that, they'll tell you when you can and can't take it. And then they'll tell you when you can and can't have sex, and then they will tell you when you can or cannot have an abortion! You give them this power, that's what they want.”

Limbaugh regularly spouts conspiracy theories about the Obama administration plots to control everything. But it's strange for him to imagine that Obama is plotting to take away birth control, abortion, and sex, when these are conservative plans.

Limbaugh's persecution complex, his bigoted hatred of women, and his increasingly paranoid belief in endless conspiracy theories have all combined to bring him the worst scandal since his illegal purchase of massive quantities of prescription drugs. And Limbaugh predictably blames his own hateful words on a vast left-wing conspiracy against him: “This is all they've got, is to go out and try to discredit their critics, to impugn and discredit the people who disagree with them.”

That's exactly what Rush Limbaugh has done for 25 years, but by picking the wrong target, and refusing to back down, Limbaugh is finally provoking Republican officials to (weakly) condemn what he has said. For years, Limbaugh has made Republicans too terrified to utter a word of critique against him. Now, calling women sluts for using birth control pills may finally be the moment when the pompous fool took his comedy routine one step too far.

Thursday, March 1, 2012

We're All Feminazis Now: Limbaugh's Long History of Sexism
Rush Limbaugh is a sexist pig, and he's proud of his misogyny. One of Limbaugh's most famous statements is, “Feminism was established so that unattractive women could have easier access to the mainstream of society.”

Limbaugh sometimes does defend women, if they are conservative. He complained about the media treatment of Sarah Palin and declared, “Nobody should be attacked because they’re a woman.” Nobody, unless it's a liberal woman like Sandra Fluke.

I said, "If we're paying for this, it makes these women sluts, prostitutes." And what else could it be? If we are buying it.

Limbaugh's comments were not only sexist, they were bizarre. Limbaugh apparently doesn't understand how birth control pills work because he said about Fluke, “Have you ever heard of not having sex so often?” Limbaugh seems to think that the number of birth control pills women take depends on how sex they have.

Limbaugh is particularly fearful of women controlling men. He wrote, "Militant feminists are pro-choice because it's their ultimate avenue of power over men....It is their attempt to impose their will on the rest of society, particularly on men." Only Limbaugh could imagine that supporting the right of women to control their own bodies is intended solely to exert power over men.

Limbaugh's sexism includes joking about rape. He once played video from a rape trial, laughing and saying “I'm trying not to laugh” as a traumatized woman detailed anal rape.

Rush even compared criticism of him from feminists to the genocidal murders in Bosnia, accusing feminists of "political cleansing": "It's just like this ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. They're trying to wipe out and shut up all the opposition."

Early in his talk show career, Limbaugh called the National Organization for Women “a terrorist organization” and described two members of the group on the air as “ugly dogs.”

Limbaugh would play the 1966 song “Born a Woman”: “A woman’s place in this old world/Is under some man’s thumb/And if you’re born a woman/You’re born to be hurt” and then yell, “She said hurt, not heard.”

Limbaugh’s view of women is perhaps best expressed by this anecdote he told about his cat:

My cat comes to me when she wants to be fed. I have learned this. I accept it for what it is. Many people in my position would think my cat's coming to me because she loves me. Well, she likes me, and she is attached, but she comes to me when she wants to be fed. And after I feed her -- guess what -- she's off to wherever she wants to be in the house, until the next time she gets hungry. She's smart enough to know she can't feed herself. She's actually a very smart cat. She gets loved. She gets adoration. She gets petted. She gets fed. And she doesn't have to do anything for it, which is why I say this cat's taught me more about women, than anything my whole life. But we put voices in their mouths.

Limbaugh may be most famous for popularizing the word “feminazi.” For decades, Limbaugh has been using the term, without apology, to smear the feminist movement. He wrote in his first book, “A Feminazi is a feminist to whom the most important thing in life is ensuring that as many abortions as possible occur.” The comparison of feminists fighting for gender equality to the most brutal and murderous regime in human history should shock everyone. But he delights in repeating the word over and over again.

Limbaugh has repeatedly asserted that he has been misquoted and was only describing a “few” feminists as feminazis. He told Playboy, “I have been misstated, misrepresented, misreported on this. A feminazi is not a feminist. A feminazi is two things: a woman to whom the most important thing in life is seeing to it that every abortion possible happens. I've not found more than 20 of those.”

He must have found a lot more, because Limbaugh said today: “So, Ms. Fluke and the rest of you feminazis, here's the deal: If we are going to pay for your contraceptives and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it. And I'll tell you what it is. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.” Wanting equality for women's health insurance coverage now makes you a “feminazi,” according to Limbaugh. The man who claimed that he's never called more than 20 women “feminazis” is now declaring that believing, as a majority of Americans do, that birth control should be covered by health insurance makes you a “feminazi.” We're all feminazis now.

About Me

Author of "The Most Dangerous Man in America: Rush Limbaugh's Assault on Reason," (limbaughbook.com). Also the author of "Barack Obama: This Improbable Quest" and "President Barack Obama: A More Perfect Union (www.obamapolitics.com), along with "Patriotic Correctness: Academic Freedom and Its Enemies" (www.collegefreedom.org) and "Newt Gingrich: Capitol Crimes and Misdemeanors".